RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
If there is a need for a repository of photos, for example, one could be set up in short order. Is there? I cant speak to the scientific need for one, but from the education standpoint I think this would be of tremendous value. If there was one central image repository that contained a micro and a marcoscopic image of every new meteorite classified (big plus if the images could be tied to the classification abstract) I can virtually guarantee it would be the most trafficed meteorite related web site on the internet. stan __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Matt, Cooperation versus Haggling? Seems like a no brainer. It does seem like a real problem vexing intellegent, dedicated inividuals. Collaboration and compromise began a country that I am fortunate to live in. Can the Meteorite Community do the real work of tighting up the standards upon which we all depend and reap the rewards of credibility that we all desire? Jerry - Original Message - From: Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:11 AM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Hi Matt and list. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think that part of the problem may also be that meteorites such as those belonging to the HED group are quite heterogeneous. If one sample contains a slightly higher diogenite component it may come back as a howardite while a sample with a lower diogenite component may come back as a eucrite. I would imagine that two samples from the same stone could conceivably come back with a different classification. If anyone can comment on this and correct me if I'm wrong I would appreciate it! Cheers -John Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
I understand this completely, but what I am getting at is cooperation and sharing of data seems to happen very little or is non-existant. The researchers I have worked with in the past also made visual pairings (along with thin section work) if there were a large number of pieces. They also took really good digital photos of cut specimens and thin sections. These should be made available to others working on NWAs in some central depository. Pairings could be made visually in many cases by the proper authorities. Also I think the Total Known Weight should really be observerved for witnessed falls. I have always thought it was a lame statistic for finds and is constantly abused. It is one of the cruxes that the current argument re: name stealing/borrwing hinges about. Matt -Original Message- From: John Birdsell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 9:33 AM To: Matt Morgan Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Hi Matt and list. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think that part of the problem may also be that meteorites such as those belonging to the HED group are quite heterogeneous. If one sample contains a slightly higher diogenite component it may come back as a howardite while a sample with a lower diogenite component may come back as a eucrite. I would imagine that two samples from the same stone could conceivably come back with a different classification. If anyone can comment on this and correct me if I'm wrong I would appreciate it! Cheers -John Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Hi Jerry and Matt and list I believe you both hit on some good concepts. It would, because of value to research, behove a buyer or finder of a special and potentially expensive meteorite, to have it classified, regardless of costs so that a better picture of the solar system and interest in doing such is the end result. With the letter about NASA and its failed/canceled projects, one can make a great arguement for such an endevor. It might also come to pass, with some good selling from the community, that such meteorites which carry an interest for research, get low or no cost analysis from NASA. Much cheaper than designing and making a window for a remote probe's spectrometer! Of course, controls will be needed to keep NASA from being flooded with requests for common stones, and so maybe a lessor University which hasn't the equipment to do qualified analysis but has the personnel to determine validity of the stone would be grateful to recieve a little extra grant money to do the screening. Just something from nowhere in south-east backwater Kentucky Mark - Original Message - From: GERALD FLAHERTY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:28 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Matt, Cooperation versus Haggling? Seems like a no brainer. It does seem like a real problem vexing intellegent, dedicated inividuals. Collaboration and compromise began a country that I am fortunate to live in. Can the Meteorite Community do the real work of tighting up the standards upon which we all depend and reap the rewards of credibility that we all desire? Jerry - Original Message - From: Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:11 AM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby
RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
There are several reasons for this result. Among these are: 1) Not all scientists are equally skilled at classifying meteorites. 2) Not all samples are representative of the whole. It used to be that a lab would have the entire mass to examine and could see the entire structure. With meteorites in commercial hands, they often just get a small chip. Given that lots of chondrites and achondrites are breccias, this can be a problem. 3) Some meteorites are borderline between types. Many of us try to make a decision as to which it is, and two people might come down on opposite sides of the line. If it actually matters, somebody will do careful work and publish on the subject. In most cases the error doesn't matter. Researchers all know that classification errors of this sort happen. 4) Nobody has ever standardized the way that brecciated meteorites should be described. Someday this will be fixed. 5) Some areas of meteorite classification are controversial (e.g., the use of type 7). We already have a consortium of labs... it is all of those labs that agree to house type specimens and make them available for research whenever an important scientific question arises. We already have a network for data sharing... it includes the Meteoritical Bulletin and the numerous scientific journals that publish abstracts and peer-reviewed research. If there is a need for a repository of photos, for example, one could be set up in short order. Is there? On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are of little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This may be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is. jeff At 11:11 AM 11/21/2004, Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really
RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Also I think the Total Known Weight should really be observerved for witnessed falls. Yes I agree, I have made this point before, with a classified NWA the weight is fixed to the piece/s classified so it's the total weight not the total known weight. Ken O'Neill -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Morgan Sent: 21 November 2004 16:48 To: 'John Birdsell' Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers I understand this completely, but what I am getting at is cooperation and sharing of data seems to happen very little or is non-existant. The researchers I have worked with in the past also made visual pairings (along with thin section work) if there were a large number of pieces. They also took really good digital photos of cut specimens and thin sections. These should be made available to others working on NWAs in some central depository. Pairings could be made visually in many cases by the proper authorities. Also I think the Total Known Weight should really be observerved for witnessed falls. I have always thought it was a lame statistic for finds and is constantly abused. It is one of the cruxes that the current argument re: name stealing/borrwing hinges about. Matt -Original Message- From: John Birdsell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 9:33 AM To: Matt Morgan Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Hi Matt and list. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think that part of the problem may also be that meteorites such as those belonging to the HED group are quite heterogeneous. If one sample contains a slightly higher diogenite component it may come back as a howardite while a sample with a lower diogenite component may come back as a eucrite. I would imagine that two samples from the same stone could conceivably come back with a different classification. If anyone can comment on this and correct me if I'm wrong I would appreciate it! Cheers -John Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Hello Jeff and thanks for your email. I think a repository of high quality photos of type specimens would be extremely useful for the entire meteorite community. Cheers -John Jeff Grossman wrote: There are several reasons for this result. Among these are: 1) Not all scientists are equally skilled at classifying meteorites. 2) Not all samples are representative of the whole. It used to be that a lab would have the entire mass to examine and could see the entire structure. With meteorites in commercial hands, they often just get a small chip. Given that lots of chondrites and achondrites are breccias, this can be a problem. 3) Some meteorites are borderline between types. Many of us try to make a decision as to which it is, and two people might come down on opposite sides of the line. If it actually matters, somebody will do careful work and publish on the subject. In most cases the error doesn't matter. Researchers all know that classification errors of this sort happen. 4) Nobody has ever standardized the way that brecciated meteorites should be described. Someday this will be fixed. 5) Some areas of meteorite classification are controversial (e.g., the use of type 7). We already have a consortium of labs... it is all of those labs that agree to house type specimens and make them available for research whenever an important scientific question arises. We already have a network for data sharing... it includes the Meteoritical Bulletin and the numerous scientific journals that publish abstracts and peer-reviewed research. If there is a need for a repository of photos, for example, one could be set up in short order. Is there? On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are of little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This may be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is. jeff At 11:11 AM 11/21/2004, Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
good quality and color of thin sections would be good as well. Heres a link to one such example of plane and polarized light thinsection. http://gmr.minsocam.org/Examples/XPolars.html Mark - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jeff Grossman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Hello Jeff and thanks for your email. I think a repository of high quality photos of type specimens would be extremely useful for the entire meteorite community. Cheers -John Jeff Grossman wrote: There are several reasons for this result. Among these are: 1) Not all scientists are equally skilled at classifying meteorites. 2) Not all samples are representative of the whole. It used to be that a lab would have the entire mass to examine and could see the entire structure. With meteorites in commercial hands, they often just get a small chip. Given that lots of chondrites and achondrites are breccias, this can be a problem. 3) Some meteorites are borderline between types. Many of us try to make a decision as to which it is, and two people might come down on opposite sides of the line. If it actually matters, somebody will do careful work and publish on the subject. In most cases the error doesn't matter. Researchers all know that classification errors of this sort happen. 4) Nobody has ever standardized the way that brecciated meteorites should be described. Someday this will be fixed. 5) Some areas of meteorite classification are controversial (e.g., the use of type 7). We already have a consortium of labs... it is all of those labs that agree to house type specimens and make them available for research whenever an important scientific question arises. We already have a network for data sharing... it includes the Meteoritical Bulletin and the numerous scientific journals that publish abstracts and peer-reviewed research. If there is a need for a repository of photos, for example, one could be set up in short order. Is there? On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are of little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This may be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is. jeff At 11:11 AM 11/21/2004, Matt Morgan wrote: Just to add a note... There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites. Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs. Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have L5's that came back as L4's and L6's. Regolith this and Primitive that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is interpretive. The system itself is flawed. Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have type specimens on hand. This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge role. So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for meteorite data sharing? It will make ALL our lives easier... Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Wesel Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM To: Michael Farmer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike: Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because repeat lab fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't like it one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my likely paired howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab, specimens I know are paired. While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks this of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same baker...they're eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much recognition. But this is what we do...for now. Rob Wesel -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Mike, If you got a shippment of meteorites from the Amgala strewnfield , would you bother to have it classified or just sell it as Amgala ? Regardless of who had the initial sample classified. NWA #'s are not proprietary. I know that people such as Adam wishes they were. If you get a shippment from Morocco .. you trust your supplier. This is something that will always be a problem. All we really can do is trust the dealer we choose to buy from. Because god knows once the material is in the hands of a moroccan dealer we really cant be 100% sure where they got it from , unless we were there to pull it out of the sand ourselves. Bob E - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Bob and all, that is why I dont take shipments any more I got a few, but the only way to buy is boots on the ground, this 33 trips completed to Morocco. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:15 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, If you got a shippment of meteorites from the Amgala strewnfield , would you bother to have it classified or just sell it as Amgala ? Regardless of who had the initial sample classified. NWA #'s are not proprietary. I know that people such as Adam wishes they were. If you get a shippment from Morocco .. you trust your supplier. This is something that will always be a problem. All we really can do is trust the dealer we choose to buy from. Because god knows once the material is in the hands of a moroccan dealer we really cant be 100% sure where they got it from , unless we were there to pull it out of the sand ourselves. Bob E - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Now that's an honest statement. Bill -- Original message -- From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] By the way, send me those meteorites, and I'll have those suckers on eBay faster than the US Senate can raise the debt ceiling:) Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Mike, Ive sold samples to people who bought samples from both Adam and I. They say that they are identical ( kind of hard for terrestrial rock to look identical to Martian meteorites isn't it ? ) People on this list ( who care about this issue ) respect your opinion. Im not asking you to classify it . Im merely asking you to report visual similarity Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, I could easily make a judgment, but then it is going against the rules, and while I have done that before, the only way to clean up this disaster is to start living by the rules, and if you buy something through the mail from Morocco, it should be submitted. Amgala like I said in a previous email, is a fall, and like Bensour or Allende, deserves different treatment from NWA #s. Still, it is a tough call. I can say as a dealer and with some experience since I announced Amgala, I could identify it, but I cant reccomend that everyone who has owned a meteorite do it. There is no substitute for experience. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Yeah, But what would call them ?? BE - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:41 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers By the way, send me those meteorites, and I'll have those suckers on eBay faster than the US Senate can raise the debt ceiling:) Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Bob, I would be glad to, and I think that specific meteorite is a great example of the problem we are facing. The Shergottite in question was widely distributed in Morocco, and many people got pieces of it. I sold under the name NWA 1068. I am not sure how to approach this one, it is unfair for people to demand that every fragment of it be classified, as it would be a waste of time and material. However, what is the solution? I really don't know. Mike - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, Ive sold samples to people who bought samples from both Adam and I. They say that they are identical ( kind of hard for terrestrial rock to look identical to Martian meteorites isn't it ? ) People on this list ( who care about this issue ) respect your opinion. Im not asking you to classify it . Im merely asking you to report visual similarity Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, I could easily make a judgment, but then it is going against the rules, and while I have done that before, the only way to clean up this disaster is to start living by the rules, and if you buy something through the mail from Morocco, it should be submitted. Amgala like I said in a previous email, is a fall, and like Bensour or Allende, deserves different treatment from NWA #s. Still, it is a tough call. I can say as a dealer and with some experience since I announced Amgala, I could identify it, but I cant reccomend that everyone who has owned a meteorite do it. There is no substitute for experience. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Well, What do you say Adam? Shall we send Mike our NWA1877 and NWA1110 Put up ... or shut up Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Bob, I would be glad to, and I think that specific meteorite is a great example of the problem we are facing. The Shergottite in question was widely distributed in Morocco, and many people got pieces of it. I sold under the name NWA 1068. I am not sure how to approach this one, it is unfair for people to demand that every fragment of it be classified, as it would be a waste of time and material. However, what is the solution? I really don't know. Mike - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, Ive sold samples to people who bought samples from both Adam and I. They say that they are identical ( kind of hard for terrestrial rock to look identical to Martian meteorites isn't it ? ) People on this list ( who care about this issue ) respect your opinion. Im not asking you to classify it . Im merely asking you to report visual similarity Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, I could easily make a judgment, but then it is going against the rules, and while I have done that before, the only way to clean up this disaster is to start living by the rules, and if you buy something through the mail from Morocco, it should be submitted. Amgala like I said in a previous email, is a fall, and like Bensour or Allende, deserves different treatment from NWA #s. Still, it is a tough call. I can say as a dealer and with some experience since I announced Amgala, I could identify it, but I cant reccomend that everyone who has owned a meteorite do it. There is no substitute for experience. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller next time you buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if not them, just how they came to call it that. Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers...a different viewpoint
This current problem will fix itself when the supplies of African and Oman meteorites dry up. Then we'll all be back to not-so-patiently waiting for new falls that never fall and hunting for individual stones and small strewnfields with always too few specimens. There will come a day when meteorite collectors will look back at the NWA era and refer to it as the proverbial good old days. Fifty years from now, they will read the NWA stories and see the pictures of the thousands of meteorites, and they will be in awe. And, when that time arrives, some of the people who regularly write to this list will be considered icons and revered historical figures; not too different than how we revere Nininger and his contemporaries today. Collectors will whisper the names of Killgore, Farmer, Haag, Thompson, Carion, Hupe, Ward, Reed, New and many, many others. They will covet their autographed books and brag about owning labels and meteorites from their collections. Some of you guys might just become legends. So, be careful what you write and say because you are becoming a part of tomorrows history. I want my grand kids to think of you guys as heroes, so don't make me disappoint them someday when I have to tell them I knew some of you before you became gentlemen. Off my soap box now, JKGwilliam At 09:52 PM 11/20/2004, Michael Farmer wrote: Bob, I would be glad to, and I think that specific meteorite is a great example of the problem we are facing. The Shergottite in question was widely distributed in Morocco, and many people got pieces of it. I sold under the name NWA 1068. I am not sure how to approach this one, it is unfair for people to demand that every fragment of it be classified, as it would be a waste of time and material. However, what is the solution? I really don't know. Mike - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, Ive sold samples to people who bought samples from both Adam and I. They say that they are identical ( kind of hard for terrestrial rock to look identical to Martian meteorites isn't it ? ) People on this list ( who care about this issue ) respect your opinion. Im not asking you to classify it . Im merely asking you to report visual similarity Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, I could easily make a judgment, but then it is going against the rules, and while I have done that before, the only way to clean up this disaster is to start living by the rules, and if you buy something through the mail from Morocco, it should be submitted. Amgala like I said in a previous email, is a fall, and like Bensour or Allende, deserves different treatment from NWA #s. Still, it is a tough call. I can say as a dealer and with some experience since I announced Amgala, I could identify it, but I cant reccomend that everyone who has owned a meteorite do it. There is no substitute for experience. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my expeditions. The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper title (as Dr Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and must not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone told you it is the same). Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our business and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see tonight. I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
Bob, It is very simple, send a type specimen to NAU or any other NomCom authorized laboratory and I will recognize your material when the NomCom assigns it an official NWA number. Using the numbers NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 will never be acceptable because the material has already been voted on. It is a simple matter, send in a type specimen and all the fragments. The fragments will be visually compared to the type specimen by a competent scientist. If a qualified scientist argues to the NomCom they are all the same and the NomCom votes that this is ok they will all be assigned an official number. Every fragment in the NWA 1110 batch was looked at by Dr. Irving, submitted to the NomCom and a number was assigned to cover the 118 grams of fragments, not a gram more. I am not authorized to compare material and make official judgements and neither is Mike. All we can do is offer an opinion. In the case of a fall the NomCom rules are different. Here is link to explain how you can make your unclassified and un-numbered material official: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~glg100-p/Meteorite.html If you are too lazy to follow through that will become your problem. There is no excuse for number piggy-backing and it is against NomCom rules. If you do not respect them you have no right to call your material anything other than unclassified. Growing ever more tired of repeating myself to someone who can not grasp the simplest concepts, Adam - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, What do you say Adam? Shall we send Mike our NWA1877 and NWA1110 Put up ... or shut up Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Bob, I would be glad to, and I think that specific meteorite is a great example of the problem we are facing. The Shergottite in question was widely distributed in Morocco, and many people got pieces of it. I sold under the name NWA 1068. I am not sure how to approach this one, it is unfair for people to demand that every fragment of it be classified, as it would be a waste of time and material. However, what is the solution? I really don't know. Mike - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, Ive sold samples to people who bought samples from both Adam and I. They say that they are identical ( kind of hard for terrestrial rock to look identical to Martian meteorites isn't it ? ) People on this list ( who care about this issue ) respect your opinion. Im not asking you to classify it . Im merely asking you to report visual similarity Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Well, I could easily make a judgment, but then it is going against the rules, and while I have done that before, the only way to clean up this disaster is to start living by the rules, and if you buy something through the mail from Morocco, it should be submitted. Amgala like I said in a previous email, is a fall, and like Bensour or Allende, deserves different treatment from NWA #s. Still, it is a tough call. I can say as a dealer and with some experience since I announced Amgala, I could identify it, but I cant reccomend that everyone who has owned a meteorite do it. There is no substitute for experience. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Comcast Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers Mike, I trust you. How about I send you a sample of my NWA 1110 and NWA 1877 and have Adam send you his. Then you can report your opinion regarding comparison back to anyone who cares. Thanks Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites
